For More Information

Kansas & Missouri Product Liability Law

Persons who have been injured because of a product they used may have a product liability claim against the product's manufacturer. Product liability claims generally fall into three categories:

Defective manufacture

Defective design

Failure to provide adequate warnings/instructions for proper use of the product

Both Kansas and Missouri have essentially the same basic laws that govern product liability claims. For each of these claims, you must show not only that the product was defective, but that the defective condition of the product caused the injury at issue. A product liability attorney can help you determine whether you have a claim and what your claim might be worth.

Comparing Types of Product Liability Claims

Defective manufacture. If you are injured because the bottle of Tylenol you bought contains arsenic, your claim would be based on a manufacturing defect — failure to manufacture the product appropriately.

Defective design. If taking a prescription drug caused you to suffer a heart attack, your claim would be based on a design defect — the product was manufactured as intended but is nevertheless defective.

Failure to warn. Finally, a prescription drug was made correctly and is generally safe for use, but you were injured because you combined it other drugs and the label failed to warn that such a combination is dangerous, your claim would be based on a failure to warn.

If you have a question about a product liability claim, please contact an experienced attorney. Call the Hamilton Law Firm at (913) 888-7100, email patrick@lenexalaw.com, or complete our online form. Based in Lenexa, in the Kansas City area, we practice throughout Kansas and Missouri.

For More Information

Recent Blog Posts

Negligence occurs when a party fails to exercise proper care and, as a result, damages occur. Laws surrounding negligence and liability vary from state to state, so it’s important to contact a Kansas and Missouri injury attorney to represent you…
Read More

If you believe you were not represented properly by an attorney, a Kansas legal malpractice attorney can help determine if you may have a claim. As you can imagine, pursuing a claim against an attorney can be an uphill battle. Attorneys that may be p…
Read More

Representative Work

On January 18, 2017, Hamilton Law Firm LLC obtained a $280,000.00 jury verdict in a legal malpractice lawsuit for Power Control Devices, Inc., an Olathe company specializing in the manufacture of electronic devices.
The underlying litigation involved a breach of contract lawsuit against Orchid Engineering, Technologies and Consulting in the Boston, Massachusetts area. After PCD’s case had been pending for almost two years, Orchid filed a motion for summary judgment contending the lawsuit was not filed before the statutes of limitation expired. The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts agreed, dismissing Power Control’s claims as untimely.
Hamilton Law firm sued Power Control’s attorney in the underlying litigation, Michael “Mick” Lerner, for legal malpractice. After a seven day jury trial in Johnson County Kansas District Court, the jury returned a verdict in favor of Power Control. PCD Verdict Form 2617
Read More

Attorneys Michael Hodges of Hodges Law Firm and Patrick Hamilton of Hamilton Law Firm obtained a $2.1 million jury verdict in a medical malpractice lawsuit in Johnson County, Kansas on April 10, 2015. The case involved an endometrial ablation procedure with a Boston Scientific Hydro Thermal Ablation (HTA) device that circulates 194º F saline solution throughout the uterus for 10 minutes to burn off the lining of the uterus. During the procedure, the defendant doctor punctured plaintiff’s uterine wall which allowed the scalding liquid to escape into plaintiff’s abdominal cavity causing severe burns to plaintiff’s intestines. Approximately two feet of plaintiff’s intestines had to be surgically removed, which forced the plaintiff to wear a colostomy bag for approximately one year. Lundeen Verdict 42115
Read More